u/rlewisfr

Are there ever Canada dates? Just wondering because I would love to see them live, but won't travel to the US.

Thanks

Just wanted to gauge interest in this sub regarding a ComfyUI workflow that I made to "convert" simple Daz3D renders into highly detailed photos. Or are you all not into that and like the Daz aesthetic as it is?

Good day all,

Just doing a post-mortem on a 3 day rugby tournament and wanted to share my conclusions about the Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 Contemporary for sports. I struggled to find the right answer to my problem leading to the tournament, and thought maybe somebody would benefit from my conclusion.

Body : 7dmkII and the 150-600

This is where I started and thought I would be using. Yeah, it's an older body for sure, but it is a decent budget setup for long reach. I struggled with the Auto-focus. Stationary, static photos were awesome up to 400mm, good up to 500mm and disappointing after 500mm. Moving shots, with fast motion? Extremely disappointed. Couldn't get things to settle in, and it seemed to skip focus a lot! Yes, I tried the manual USB dock adjustments, but it just wasn't accurate or consistent enough to build my confidence.

Body : 7dmkII and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L

Ok, so way fewer problems here with the AF. Image quality as expected is much better. However, with the 1.6x crop, this 112mm-320mm has way too much overlap with the 150-600 on a full-frame. In isolation, if I had one lens to shoot a field game, I think the 70-200 on a crop body is the way to go if you are on a budget and/or need to shoot lower light.

Body : R6mkII and the 150-600

AF was way better, and this is the combo I ultimately went with. There were only a few shots where the lens AF let me down, but considering I used it for 3 days, that is a fantastic result.

That being said, I tried to limit myself to the 400mm as the max range. As soon as I saw the aperture jump from 5.6 to 6.3, I knew I was making a "reach-over-image-quality" choice. Up to 400mm on the R6, this lens resolves beautifully. Probably not up to the 100-400 v2 Canon lens, but given what you pay for, it is very good. If I needed the shot over 400mm, I took it. But the results show time and time again that this lens falls apart after 500mm.

2nd Body : Rented R6mkII and the EF 70-200 f2.8

Sitting on my lap was another R6mkII that I rented. Matched up the settings exactly so I could pick it up without making mental adjustments. Turns out, I didn't use it much but only because my daughter used it, cruising the sidelines and grabbing closer action and team/crowd shots. When I did use it, I never got used to the physical switching (throwing the monopod 150-600 onto my shoulder and picking up the 70-200). I'm just not that experienced at that maneuver. YMMV

Conclusion : on an R body this lens is a song for the money...from 150-400mm. I imagine the R8 would perform the same and I thought about buying one as the 2nd body, but chose to rent instead. I personally would limit your expectations after 400mm, and I wouldn't call the 500mm-600mm good. Useable in a pinch, but not good.

Hope this helps someone.

Just looking for opinions. Shooting a rugby tournament coming up and I am looking for a longer lens for better coverage.

Canon R6 mkII and 7d mkII

My 70-200 f2.8 on the 7d is not quite long enough. I get about 2/3 coverage on the sideline, but from the try line it can't reach far enough down the pitch.

I cannot swing the 100-400 cost wise, and renting would be about $350 for the weekend.

I have a line on a 300mm f4 or a 400mm 5.6, both are close to the same price.

I normally shoot indoor sports, so this would be just outdoor lens.

My question is if the 400mm on the APS-C 7d2 too long? I hear the IQ and the AF is better on the 400mm. I used to own the 300mm long time ago but it was not used for sports so I still have no frame of reference. I plan to have the 70-200 on the R6 for the final try line shots.

Thanks for the help!